********************************************************    
                                         NOTICE
    ********************************************************
                                
                This document was converted from
           WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format.
                                
   Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
             will not show up in this text version.
                                
All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
    original document will not show up in this text version.
                                
        Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
           will not be preserved in the text version.
                                
        If you need the complete document, download the
  WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.
                                
*****************************************************************
                                                           Before the
               Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554



In the Matter of Applications of

REGIONET WIRELESS LICENSE, LLC

for the Authority to Operate Automated
Maritime Telecommunications Service in
Various Locations in the United States 
)
)
)
)
)
)
)


File Nos. 853269-853286




                             ORDER

   Adopted:  January 24, 2001           Released:  January 31, 2001

By the Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division, Wireless Telecommunications Bureau:

                        I.  INTRODUCTION

        1.     On July 6, 2000, Warren C. Havens (Havens) filed a petition to deny Automated
        Maritime Telecommunications System (AMTS) station applications filed by Regionet
        Wireless License, LLC (Regionet) for the Savannah River, Chesapeake Bay, south coastal
        region of California, Sacramento River Delta area, and Apalachicola and Chattahoochee
        Rivers.  For the reasons that follow, Havens's petition is granted in part, and Regionet's
        applications to serve the Savannah River, Chesapeake Bay, south coastal region of California,
        Sacramento River Delta area and the Apalachicola and Chattahoochee Rivers are dismissed.

                        II.  BACKGROUND
                                
2.AMTS stations provide automated, integrated, interconnected ship-to-shore
communications similar to a cellular phone system for tugs, barges, and other maritime
vessels.  There are two frequency groups of twenty channel pairs each available for
assignment to AMTS stations.  Under Section 80.475(a) of the Commission's Rules,
AMTS applicants who propose to serve a navigable inland waterway that is less than 150
miles in length must serve that waterway in its entirety.  On the other hand, AMTS
applicants who propose to serve a navigable inland waterway that is more than 150 miles in
length, must provide continuity of service for at least 60 percent of the waterway. 
Applicants proposing to serve a portion of the Atlantic, Pacific, or Gulf of Mexico coastline
must provide continuity of service to a substantial navigational area. 
                                
3.In establishing the rules permitting AMTS stations, the Commission considered
the potential for interference to television reception, particularly Channels 10 and 13
because of the proximity of AMTS frequencies to these television channels, and
conditioned the operation of AMTS coast stations on the requirement that no harmful
interference be caused to television reception.  Under the Commission's Rules, an
applicant proposing to locate an AMTS station within 129 kilometers (80 miles) of a
Channel 10 television station and/or 169 kilometers (105 miles) of a Channel 13 television
station must submit an engineering study demonstrating the means used to avoid
interference within that particular television station's Grade B contour.  The study must
include a description of the interference contour and the method used to determine that
contour, along with a statement that provides the number of residences within the contour. 
Where there are at least one hundred residences within both a proposed AMTS station's
predicted interference contour and a television station's Grade B contour, the AMTS applicant
must (1) show that the proposed site is the only suitable location, (2) develop a plan to control
any interference its operations cause within the Grade B contour, and (3) agree to make any
necessary adjustments to affected television receivers to eliminate such interference.
                                
4.On May 17, 2000, Regionet filed applications for AMTS stations that would serve
the Apalachicola and Chattahoochee Rivers, Savannah River, Chesapeake Bay, and south
coastal region of California.  On May 18, 2000, Regionet filed applications for AMTS
stations that would serve the Sacramento River Delta area.  On June 6, 2000, Regionet's
applications appeared on public notice.  On July 6, 2000, Havens filed a petition to deny
these applications.  On July 17, 2000, Mobex and Regionet filed an opposition to Havens's
petition to deny.  On July 26, 2000, Havens filed a reply.  
                                
5.On July 6, 2000, KCOP Television, Inc. (KCOP), licensee of a Channel 13
television station in Los Angeles, California, petitioned to deny one of the two AMTS
stations that Regionet proposed for the south coastal region of California.  Specifically,
KCOP argued that over one million residences in its Grade B contour, rather than
Regionet's claim of less than one hundred residences, would also be in the interference
contour of the proposed AMTS station at Verdugo Hills, California. On August 2, 2000,
Regionet requested the withdrawal of its application for the AMTS station at Verdugo
Hills.  On January 2, 2001, Regionet's request was granted.
                                
                        III.  DISCUSSION
                                
6.Havens argues that the Regionet applications provide no basis for the assertion
that in the case of each proposed AMTS station, fewer than one hundred residences are
within the overlap between the station's predicted interference contour and a Channel 13
television station's Grade B.  Regionet contends that in each case, the interference contour
overlaps the Grade B contour in low population density areas and for that reason, it believes
the overlap encompasses fewer than one hundred residences. 
                                
7.We note that Regionet withdrew its application for an AMTS station in Verdugo
Hills after KCOP presented evidence contradicting Regionet's claim that fewer than one
hundred residences were contained in the overlapping contours.  In addition, even a cursory
review of the applications, some of which propose stations in such places as San Diego, San
Francisco, and Sacramento, belies Regionet's representation that it reviewed the proposed
locations and determined the areas of overlap to have low population densities.  Finally, closer
examination of the subject applications reveals that the overlaps generally are significant and
often encompass entire towns and even entire counties.  Consequently, we find unconvincing
Regionet's assertion that fewer than one hundred residences are within the overlapping
contours.  As indicated previously, where there are at least one hundred residences within both
a proposed AMTS station's predicted interference contour and a television station's Grade B
contour, the AMTS applicant must show that the proposed site is the only suitable location,
develop a plan to control any interference its operations cause within the Grade B contour, and
agree to make any necessary adjustments to affected television receivers to eliminate such
interference.  Because Regionet did not make such a showing, we will dismiss as defective
its applications for AMTS stations that would serve the Savannah River, Chesapeake Bay,
south coastal region of California, Sacramento River Delta area, and Apalachicola and
                 Chattahoochee Rivers. 
                                
                     IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES
                                
8.Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 303(r), and Section 1.939
of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.939, the petition to deny File Nos. 853269-77,
and 853279-86, filed by Warren C. Havens, on July 6, 2000 IS GRANTED IN PART as set
                      forth above.
                                
9.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED pursuant to Sections 4(i) and 303(r) of the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C.  154(i), 303(r), and Sections
1.934(d) and 80.475(a) of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  1.934(d), 80.475(a), File
Nos. 853269-77, and 853279-86, filed by Regionet Wireless License, LLC on May 17 and
                18, 2000 ARE DISMISSED.
                                
10.This action is taken under delegated authority pursuant to Sections 0.131 and
0.331 of the Commission's Rules, 47 C.F.R.  0.131, 0.331.
                                
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                 
                 
                 
                 
         D'wana R. Terry
Chief, Public Safety and Private Wireless Division
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau